Sacramento, CA March 16, 2009

Making a Difference in After School: Measuring and Improving

After School Quality Nicole Yohalem,

Forum for Youth Investment

Sacramento, CAMarch 16, 2009

© The Forum for Youth Investment 2008

Quality assessment tools

• Assessing Afterschool Program Practices Tool (APT)National Institute on Out-of-School Time and the MA Department of Education

• CORAL Observation Tool (CORAL) Public/Private Ventures

• Out-of-School Time Observation Instrument (OST)Policy Studies Associates

• Program Observation Tool (POT)National Afterschool Association

• Program Quality Observation (PQO)Deborah Vandell and Kim Pierce

• Promising Practices Rating Scale (PPRS)WI Center for Education Research and Policy Studies Associates, Inc.

• Quality Assurance System (QAS)Foundations Inc.

• Program Quality Self-Assessment Tool (QSA)New York State Afterschool Network

• School-Age Care Environment Rating Scale (SACERS)Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center, UNC

• Youth Program Quality Assessment (YPQA)High/Scope Educational Research Foundation

Measuring Youth Program QualityA Guide to Quality Assessment ToolsUpdated January 2009


Quality assessment tools

There is a lot of similarity in how quality practice is defined. All tools assess: • Relationships• Environment• Engagement• Social/Behavioral Norms• Skill Building Opportunities• Routine/Structure

Note: CA self-assessment tool includes items that address these areas.


Measuring what matters

• Importance of the point-of-service.

• Good measures have clear, unambiguous items.

• The best measures also teach.


Emphasis on point-of-service

• CA Tool: 16 of 77 items focus on POS

• SACERS & NAA < half focus on POS

• APT & YPQA > half focus on POS


Clear and unambiguous?

Examples from the CA tool:

High inference• Ensures staff & volunteers have respectful

interactions with participants & families.

Low inference: • Regularly provides families with program

information in multiple languages and literacy levels.


Measures that teach?

Examples from the CA Tool:

Diagnostic• Provides opportunities & support for participants to take on

leadership roles.

Diagnostic and prescriptive• Regularly provides collaborative partners with program

information, such as program progress and evaluation reports and information about program events, in a variety of formats and in multiple languages if appropriate.


Quality improvement

Key components of quality improvement systems:• Quality standards that include what should happen

at the point of service• Ongoing assessment of how well services compare

to the standards• Targeted plans for how to improve• Training and coaching that fits improvement plans


Emerging examples and lessons

• Afterschool Program Assessment System (APAS)National Institute on Out-of-School Time

• Youth Program Quality Intervention (YPQI)Weikart Center for Youth Program Quality


APAS pilot

• Conducted by NIOST, Wellesley College• October 2006-July 2008• Atlanta, Boston, Charlotte , Middlesex Cnty NJ• 65 individuals, 28 programs, 3 intermediaries• Well-established K-8 after-school programs• Low stakes• Emphasis on continuous improvement, flexibility


Core APAS tools and supports

Tools• Survey of Afterschool Youth Outcomes Tool (SAYO)• Assessing Afterschool Program Practices Tool (APT)• Web-Based Data Management System

Supports• Training (2 days up front, online training ongoing)• 1-day site visit• Local coach


Findings from the APAS pilot

• APAS helped programs identify areas for improvement and staff development

• Most sites said they made program changes as a result.• Coaches are key to implementation and useful to sites • Engagement across staff levels is important• Engaging funders is important (even with low stakes)

based on follow-up phone interviews with sites and coaches

For more on APAS: www.niost.org/content/view/1654/282/


mbus

etroit

Minneapolis

`` `

l

Kentucky

Iowa

Oklahoma

New York

Rhode Island

Austin

Sacramento/ Georgetown

Divide Columbus

Indianapolis

Grand Rapids

Nashville

St. Louis

Washington*

West Palm Beach County

Rochester

Chicago

Youth Program Quality Intervention

Systemic quality improvement systems (QIS) anchored by the YPQA being developed in: –Statewide strategies: MI, ME, MN, RI, NM, KY, IA, WA, AR, NY–Cities and Counties: Austin, Chicago, Rochester, Detroit, Grand Rapids, Palm Beach County, Baltimore,

Nashville, St. Louis, Louisville, Georgetown Divide/Sacramento, Columbus IN, Indianapolis IN, Tulsa OK

New Mexico

Arkansas

Baltimore

Seattle


YPQI Focus: POS quality in context

POSPoint-of-Service

Engagem

ent

Interactio

n

Support

SafetyPLC

Professional Learning

Community

SAESystem

AccountabilityEnvironment

•Org policies/practices•Management values•Performance feedback•Continuity/staffing•Standards and metrics•Staff development

Youth PQA Form A

Youth PQA Form B


Incentivizing participation

PASA “endorsed” programs must: • Maintain certain enrollment and retention

benchmarks• Have a written curriculum• Undergo self-assessment using RIPQA annually

In exchange for: • Streamlined grant application process• Small administrative funding supplement


Requiring participation

Excerpt from Rhode Island 21st CCLC RFP

“Applicants must participate in the 21st CCLC Rhode Island Youth Program Quality Assessment Process (RIPQA), which includes the use of a self-assessment tool, outside observations, development and implementation of action plans to strengthen the program over time, working with a Technical Advisor, including designation of staff to coordinate the process.”


Rhode Island 21st CCLC pilot

Assessment & Planning1. Kick-off, 2-day training on RIPQA2. Quality Advisor (QA) meets with programs individually to orient3. Observation visits (3-8 programs per site)4. QA develops progress report, teams meet with instructors to share reports and

develop action plans5. ED and other key staff complete Form B individually6. QA summarizes, meets with team to discuss scores and improvement strategies 7. QA generates overall report on strengths and improvement steps

Training & Technical Assistance• Series of 2-hour workshops focused on RI-PQA content• Additional training on behavior management• AYD training (32 hours) offered twice annually• 4-session supervisor training• 5 hours of on-site coaching per site from QA


RI 21st CCLC pilot – lessons

Lessons Learned• Programs liked tool and found process worthwhile• Initial data collection model was time consuming• Timing is important to ensure changes get implemented• Needs across sites are very similar• Strong desire for on-site TA/coaching

Adjustments for Cohort 2• Smaller observation teams, fewer observations per site• One program report as opposed to individualized reports• Additional TA/training• Start with Form B, then observations (Form A)

For more information: www.mypasa.org/pasa-strategies


Palm Beach County QIS Pilot

PDTraining

• Centerpiece of the Prime Time Initiative• 38 providers in pilot; now working with 90• January 2006 – fall 2007• Based on the PBC-PQA• Financial incentives for programs


Findings from the Palm Beach pilot

• Most programs completed all phases of QIS• Quality improved• Quality improvement is a long-term process• On-site TA very important component• Clarity of purpose is critical

Spielberger & Lockaby, 2008www.chapinhall.org


Coaching

Characteristics: • Willing to listen• Experienced• Accessible• Flexible• Responsive• Creative• Resourceful

Roles/functions: •Keep programs engaged•Deliver training•Answer questions on tools, process•Participate in observations•Generate reports•Facilitate improvement planning•Provide on-site feedback, modeling

Key considerations: •Program vs. system-level coaching, role of intermediaries•Dosage


Purposes and methods

Smith, Devaney, Akiva & Sugar forthcoming in New Directions


Lessons for California

1. Have well defined purposes for the system. 2. Focus on the point of service. 3. Anchor quality improvement efforts with data about the POS.4. Create incentives for continuous improvement.5. Build in on-site, ongoing technical assistance/coaching. 6. Be intentional about pilot participation.7. Build learning communities.8. Recognize that management is a key lever.9. Worry about the quality of your measures and data.

For more information: Nicole Yohalem, Program Director

Forum for Youth [email protected]

www.forumfyi.org

Documents

Sacramento, CA March 16, 2009